General:This meeting of the Advisory Group [ OAG ], formerly the Advisory Committee, started withbriefings by the Veterans Ombudsman [VO] and members of the Office of Veterans Ombudsman[OVO] on the ongoing investigations and reviews. The briefings fuelled active discussion.VAC Budget and Staff Cuts:During the meeting the VO and Chief of Staff were briefed by the VAC DM on the federalbudgetís impact on VAC. Essentially, there will be no cuts to current benefits or programmes.However, it is expected that about three hundred VAC employees will be cut over the next threeyears. These staff cuts are additional to the five hundred staff cuts recommended by the 2010Coulter Report and will lead to VAC restructuring and decentralizing. The VO funding and staffremain intact.The VO Operating Environment:The VO operates in a large complex bureaucratic structure. A structure that has its own rules,environment, and characteristics and it is constantly evolving in unpredictable ways. This structureis not always open to the VO conducting investigations into its workings or its failings. However,professional work by the VO is paying off as increasingly the fact-based reports he issues are hard torefute and even more difficult to ignore. Witness events recently on the VRAB Report issued by theVO.Who is the enemy?Veterans often ask this question. No simple answer is available. Perhaps it is VAC, but one shouldnot discount Treasury Board, National Defence, or Health Canada or a combination thereof. Isuggest the answer lays with understanding that whenever public money and/or benefits areavailable for distribution an accounting system is set up. A system which grows constantlybecoming increasingly complex so that eventually it reaches the optimum bureaucratic level ofsatisfaction. That is when more money is spent managing the system than is spent providing benefitto those the system is meant to serve.SISIP versus NVC:For years we have known about the serious interface problems with DNDís Service IncomeSecurity Insurance Plan [SISIP] and VACís New Veterans Charter [NVC]. Yet the problems remainunresolved despite repeated attempts by the veteransí associations and various advocates to triggerGovernment action. Hopefully the recent Federal Court of Canada findings on the SISIP-NVC classaction case will lead to the resolution of these interface problems to the betterment of veterans andin the process improve the NVC.NVC Review:The NVC is supposedly a Living Document. The VO has undertaken an independent review of theNVC. Findings of the review and recommendations will be evidence based using case studies toidentify the problems, where, and why more changes are necessary to the NVC, and the cost ofimplementation. The VOís report will go to the Minister and then to Parliament, where the HouseStanding Committee on Veterans Affairs is working on its own review.

Opportunities are available for us to provide input into the VO review. If you have concerns with theNVC now is the time for you to help. Help by preparing reports and sending them to our VO. Baseyour comments on facts alone. The VO needs hard cold facts to justify the need for change in theNVC.Breaches of Privacy:Regretfully as we know some veteranís personal files in VAC have been breached and theinformation gained improperly then used inappropriately. The VOís Terms of Reference do notpermit him to investigate breaches of privacy. A Government of Canada Privacy Commissionerexists for this purpose. Tight controls now apply across the Government and more to the point withinVAC itself. VAC is working hard to forestall new breaches. The Minister has directed staff to followprivacy regulations precisely. However, the reality is that to do their jobís on our behalf VAC staffmust open personal files. Given the number of legitimate requirements to open files the reality isthat eventually a privacy problem will occur. That being said there is a vast difference between anact of omission, or a mistake, and an act of commission when applied to opening personal files.Visits of VO:The VO besides routinely briefing Parliamentary Committees and other groups is visiting veteransacross the country. He visited Quebec, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and Northern Ontario duringthe winter, Vancouver in March, and Saskatchewan in April. More visits are coming. Track hismovement on his web site so that you can attend his briefings and bull pit sessions when he is inyour area.Active Service:The status of an individualís service is an old issue and lacks clarity. Here is the question I posed tothe OVO staff. Since the CF have been on active service through Order in Councils dating back to1973, similar to the Order in Councils from 1945 and earlier, then there should be an all-inclusivedefinition of veteran with equal access to veteransí benefits.The OVO legal advisor identified forty major files on this old and complex topic. In an initial reviewof the documents, it was determined that the following applies to both veterans and servingmembers.1. The Canadian Forces have been effectively on active service since the passing of Order in Council[OIC] 1950-4365 and subsequent amendments.2. The OIC P.C.1950-4365 was revoked on 20 November 1973 and was replaced on the same daywith OIC P.C. 1973-3641 to meet Canadaís obligations under the North Atlantic Treaty. Continuingactive service status for CF members.3. An OIC issued April 6, 1989 placed both the regular and reserve force on active service.4. The CF have been on active service for NATO duties since 1973. The continuation of issuing ofOICs is done by the Governor in Council when a significant number of CF personnel participate in aspecial mission. *

* BP-303E Parliament, The National Defence Act, and the Decision to Participate, MichaelRossignol Political and Social Affairs Division August 1992.The above material is based on the National Defence Act R.s.c., 1985, c. N-5 which does not includea Definition of Active Service in the Act, however, Section 31[1] state:31. [1] The Governor in Council may place the Canadian Forces or any component, unit or otherelement thereof or any officer or noncommissioned member thereof on active service anywhere in orbeyond Canada at any time when it appears advisable to do so.The Act then goes on expanding the conditions and circumstance and those interested can look upthe applicable parts of the NDA and review it in more detail.Beside the question of active service is another layer of questions related to the possible benefitís CFveterans from various campaigns after the Korean War may be entitled to.It is my understanding, and I emphasize my understanding, that the Government can decide ascircumstances warrant changing the status of CF members relative to their service status. TheGovernment also has traditionally decided what veteranís benefits are available. After WWII, forexample, different levels of benefits were provided to veterans based on their individual service. If aveteran served only in Canada, there was a benefit package. If the veteran had service in the UnitedKingdom, another level of benefits applied. If the veteran had experienced combat then more andother benefits were available.I appreciate that the above may not satisfy everyone. However, in the interest of keeping this reportshort I feel we now have a reasonable answer to the question of active service and its possible impacton benefits. Hopefully the above addresses veteransí concerns on entitlements to benefits. Whethertheir active service entitles them to other forms of recognition, for example, the Canadian VoluntaryService Medal is another matter.Conclusion:The VO and his staff are doing good work. They are making solid progress. Increasingly their workis recognized. Facts from quality investigations drive change. Remember our VO does not have abag of fairy dust to sprinkle over problems and solve them. Problems that have existed for years andcontinue to trouble veterans require hard work to resolve. Check out the VOís web site and if youhave facts that you think can help him and us all then contribute.Joseph GollnerPatron CPVA